Abstract:Based on publications indexed in the Web of Science, the current study focused on internationally collaborated publications and publications acknowledging government funding of developing and developed countries including China, the US, Germany, the Netherlands, South Africa, and Brazil. Specific focus is placed on national funding agencies (i.e., focal agencies) supporting competitive research in science. The focal agencies of the six countries include the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC), the US National Science Foundation (NSF), German Research Foundation, the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO), National Research Foundation of South Africa (NRF), and National Council for Scientific and Technological Development of Brazil (CNPq). Results show that different countries vary in arrangement of government funding sources in support of competitive research projects. China and Brazil are centralized to the NSFC and CNPq, whereas the remaining four countries have relatively decentralized sources. The six focal national funding agencies of the current study are more efficient than non-focal agencies in raising citation impact, with the NWO, NSF, and NSFC perform better than non-focal agencies of corresponding countries. International collaboration improves citation impact, with the developing countries benefit more. Authorship (first or corresponding authorship) also plays a role in international collaboration. Collaboration led by authors from developed countries has a positive effect whereas that led by authors from developing countries usually have negative effects on citation impact. Interaction between funding and collaboration may have results different from those when these two factors are considered separately, which suggests being cautious while discussing effects of either of the two factors.

A Bilateral Comparison of Research Performance at an Institutional Level

Comparison of universities' scientific performance using bibliometric indicators

An In-Depth Analysis of Government Funding and International Collaboration in Scientific Research

A Comparison Study of Educational Scientific Collaboration in China and the USA

Comparing nanotechnology landscapes in the US and China: a patent analysis perspective

Independent research of China in Science Citation Index Expanded during 1980–2011

Networks of Research Collaboration in China: Evidence from Nanotechnology Publication Activities, 1990-2006

A Comparative Study of Domestic and Cross‐country Impact of Chinese and U.S. Publications in Chemistry

Comparative Study on Output Performance of Major Public Funds in Terms of Chinese-language Publications

The Role of Chinese-American Scientists in China-US Scientific Collaboration: A Study in Nanotechnology

Research on measuring and assessing the development of nanotechnology based on co-countries and co-institutions analysis

Characteristics of Research in China Assessed with Essential Science Indicators

The Nanotechnology Race Between China and the United States

Comparison of Independent Research of China’s Top Universities Using Bibliometric Indicators

International Performance of Chinese Institutes in Different Disciplines——A Bibliometric View

The dominance of big teams in China's scientific output

Does the web of science accurately represent chinese scientific performance?

The dominance of big teams in China’s scientific output

Regional Analysis on Chinese Scientific Output

Two Poles in Global Nano Research: Structure and Evolution of the Global Nano Collaborative Innovation Network

Leadership in Cooperation: A Scientometrics Analysis on China's Participation in International Science and Technology Cooperation